Indian Military Aviation

shanksinha · Post by **shanksinha** » 06 Dec 2010 01:15

^^ Nice Colours Rahul M and a good colourful language too with just the balanced amount of profanities. But then I guess if one is a Forum Moderator............anything goes right!

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 06 Dec 2010 01:37

shanksinha wrote:^^ Nice Colours Rahul M and a good colourful language too with just the balanced amount of profanities. But then I guess if one is a Forum Moderator............anything goes right!

You come across as someone with a lot of leisure time and little knowledge. While you may enjoy unending display of sarcasm and snide remarks, most members here would rather prefer facts and reasoned arguments....on the line of RahulM's reply to you.

I am afraid that with your current attitude, you may find yourself more at home in one of the TSP's many forums.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 06 Dec 2010 01:50

shanksinha wrote:^^ Nice Colours Rahul M and a good colourful language too with just the balanced amount of profanities. But then I guess if one is a Forum Moderator............anything goes right!

If you have no arguments to present then don't bother to post yaar. as simple as that. don't waste the forum's time or bandwidth with these types of posts. If you have data to argue with what Rahul posted, then do so, otherwise what you're doing is called "trolling" on most forums and is not tolerated too long.

shanksinha · Post by **shanksinha** » 06 Dec 2010 02:02

^^ on the contrary Gaur Sahab my only intention here is to listen, learn and enjoy. I do accept the lots of leisure time award though but it certainly not my intention to spend it on sarcasm.
Rahul M could be right or could be wrong, but then it wasnt me who opened up with things like "ignorant", "stupid", "stupidity" etc etc. Name calling beacause of something as trivial as internet posts is pitiable.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 06 Dec 2010 02:14

The LCA as previous reports noted has a weight of 10.5T with full internal fuel, 7 pylons & 2 R73E missiles. MTOW is 13T, which gives payload of 2.5T, which can be split between fuel, bombs and other missiles.
In Air to Ground, LCA has 4 pylons free to carry (apart from 2 R-73E) on wings, 2500 Kg of bombs & fuel plus central pylon. IAF has 1000 pound bombs which are 450 Kgs each, LCA can still carry 680 Kgs in center tank, which translates to 750 Liters fuel, assuming tank is 80 Kg itself.

As can be seen, the LCA does have a fairly respectable payload.

Rahul M brings out the comparison with Mirage. So lets look at it compared to the aircraft which it is meant to replace:

MiG 21 bis has a payload half of LCA MK1 at 1250 Kg and fewer pylons (5 to LCAs 7+1).
http://www.mig-21.de/english/technicaldata.htm

Comparing fuel, it shows that Bis has 2750 L of fuel versus LCA which has ~ 3000 L/2486 Kg.
SFC of LCA engine (ref: Rahuls post above) is 82.6 (std units) vs Tumansky R-25's 93:

(93 kg/(h·kN) (0.91 lb/(h·lbf)) at idle)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tumansky_R-25

So the LCA clearly outperforms its "predecessor" by a significant margin. This is despite size limits firmly in the MiG-21 class, so it is clearly technology & a newer generation of design coming into play.

And in avionics & systems it compares better than the non upgraded Mirage today (Elbit Dash helmet & R73E missile confirmed versus only Magic 2 on Mirage 2000), and will remain superior in some aspects even after the upgrade especially if Mirage 2000 Upgrade goes for RDY3 not RDY2 radar.

Mirage 2000 brings significantly more payload as it is mentioned as in the class of 5.5T -6T for the Mirage, which should help it for long range missions. Basically, as Rahul M points out, to complement the internal fuel & add range. But how common is this & how often will this be required.

In IAF usage though, only pic i can find is this of something close to a heavy load. See a loadout of a central tank, 2 missiles probably, a heavy bomb & a jammer.

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/Image ... 4.jpg.html

The LCA may have lesser payload overall, but has more pylons allowing more flexibility & from estimates, a comparable range on internal fuel alone (going by fuel fraction).
http://www.lca-tejas.org/images/lcaweapup8.jpg

So clearly, for most of its intended missions, LCA MK1 should do ok.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 06 Dec 2010 02:24

karan loaded weight is 9760 kg by the latest info-board, not 10500 kg.

the significant variation in empty weight and loaded weight even from official sources leads me to believe that they weigh the latest version of the LCA and use its value in the info-boards.
going by which the IOC standard should be somewhere around 9500kg.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 06 Dec 2010 02:32

Rahul,

I was going by Ajai Shuklas article in Business Standard which states that weight of a LCA with full fuel + 7 pylons + 2 R73E missiles is around 10.5Tons. The weight with fuel & lubricants etc, without pylons, missiles etc is around 9.5T. Putting each pylon as 100 Kg, the missiles as 105Kg each & the rest for gun ammo etc, I think 10.5T is a reasonable estimate.

My point is that even with this estimate, we can see the LCA brings a lot to the table, with a payload which exceeds that of the MiG-21 & with a pylon capability that is better than the MiG-21 & Mirage 2000 both. Both have only 5 pylons displayed in every pic I have seen of these aircraft in IAF service.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 06 Dec 2010 09:11

the Upg M2K with no engine change or structural change possible is likely to remain with same pylons and 2 drop tanks -vs- the more pylons and 3 drop tanks of the M2K-5.

the wiki of M53 engine says two versions - we surely have the older model ... not sure if its possible to uprate to the newer model in our upg (there is no mention of it in the items). the older model is same specs IN20.

* M53-5 - powered initial Mirage 2000C models [1]
o Dry thrust: 54.0 kN (5,500 kgp / 12,230 lbf)
o Afterburning thrust: 86.3 kN (8,800 kgp / 19,400 lbf)

* M53-P2 - powered later Mirage 2000C models and used to upgrade earlier models [2]
o Dry thrust: 64.7 kN (6,600 kgp / 14,500 lbf)
o Afterburning thrust: 95.1 kN (9,700 kgp / 21,400 lbf)

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 06 Dec 2010 10:11

Guys,

Perhaps I dont understand International relations. But why do the French need to be molified. The equipment designed by then make you pay through the nose. The service life will not be enhanced for the M2k. Then why pay as much as desided by the French.

WRT motlfication, I think that the Nuke reactor deal it self ought to do the job. If crumbs is what they are interetsted in.

M2k Upgrade as concieved is not the way to do it.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 06 Dec 2010 13:42

MMS has made a statement today after signing nuclear deal that M2K upg with France will be signed, but he said price and technical issues remain to be finalized.

so like it or not, France has the deal in the bag.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 06 Dec 2010 13:52

FWIW the reason I have been told why the IAF is opting for a full package deal with French for M2K deal is because there is great deal of appreciation for the aircraft in totality and there is a lobby in the IAF that would want to see M2K gets the best suite rather then chopped up face lift.

Juggi G · Post by **Juggi G** » 06 Dec 2010 14:34

Top Gun of Pune, Hrushikesh Moolgavkar
Daily News & Analysis

vardhank · Post by **vardhank** » 06 Dec 2010 16:01

Pratyush wrote:Guys,

Perhaps I dont understand International relations. But why do the French need to be molified. The equipment designed by then make you pay through the nose. The service life will not be enhanced for the M2k. Then why pay as much as desided by the French.

WRT motlfication, I think that the Nuke reactor deal it self ought to do the job. If crumbs is what they are interetsted in.

M2k Upgrade as concieved is not the way to do it.

I believe it's the UNSC seat. Sarko's been making noises about backing India, and maybe the $2 billion is the price for his vote. And if in any case the IAF likes the Mirage so much, then it's more or less win-win all round.
Might go the same way with/might be going the same way with buying US stuff.
Maybe the brass are confident that we're sanctions-proofed enough to do this, and that the equipment we're getting is good enough.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 06 Dec 2010 16:41

Lockheed Martin set to deliver India's first C-130J
Flight Global

The Indian air force's first of six Lockheed Martin C-130J tactical transports will be handed over to the US Air Force on 16 December, ahead of its delivery to the nation in late January. To be based as Hindon air base, New Delhi's first US-built military aircraft will make its public debut at the Aero India air show in Bangalore in early February, says Abhay Paranjape, Lockheed's director, C-130J India.

India's first three stretched-fuselage Hercules are involved in pre-delivery testing at Lockheed's Marietta site in Georgia, with the second to also be signed over to the USAF during December and flown to Hindon in late February. The nation's other three aircraft are on the final assembly line in Marietta.

Lockheed is to train the first batch of Indian air force pilots on the C-130J, following their receipt of initial instruction provided by the USAF at Little Rock AFB, Arkansas. The company will also train combat system operators and maintainers, and also deliver a three-year package of maintenance, support and sustainment for the C-130J for its first Asian customer for the type. Meanwhile, Lockheed expects New Delhi to issue a formal letter of request for a second batch of six C-130Js early next year, potentially around the Aero India show

.

Sandeep_ghosh · Post by **Sandeep_ghosh** » 06 Dec 2010 20:16

Dear BR members,

I was wondering if we have adequate hardware for CAS role. Our prime ingress into conflict zone has been dependent on the three armored corps. Do we have sufficient aircrafts designated purely for CAS and anti armour warfare.

Do we need a A10 like aircraft which is dedicated to ground support role?

Are the Jaguars and MIG 27's sufficient is providing ground support in case of any aggression in the eastern border in mountainous terrain as they did not prove to be effective in kargil sector?

Thanks and regards

P.S Please use layman terms to answer the query if possible ,

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 07 Dec 2010 02:33

Hi Sandeep,

We are already operate an excellent CAS fighter in form of the MiG-27. The upgraded variants are equipped with advanced EW suite, LGBs, day night attack and reconnaissance capabilty and armour protection. Whats more, it has adequate range to attack targets deep into Pakistan.

Kargil is not your 'typical' scenario for fighters. The LCH is on the way and should take care of future exigencies. A10 is a super specialized aircraft which we can do without.

Juggi G · Post by **Juggi G** » 07 Dec 2010 04:47

Germany Offers India Joint Defence Production for Third-Party Sale

Yet another contract is the mid-air refueller aircraft for the IAF, which order is worth $2 billion.

The Airbus Corp, the subsidiary of a pan-European Aerospace Corporation, European aeronautic defence and apace aompany, is bidding for re-fuellers.

Matussek said the Airbus Corp has offered 'highly' competitive bid to the IAF for six re-fueller aricraft.

'The tender offers option to reconfigure the aircraft for transport, including VIP transport. So you have the aircraft and it is up to you if you want to use it as the re-fueller or as you can chip around the furniture and the interior and use it as a VIP aircraft. I think this has been judged best value for money already a year ago,' the envoy said.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 07 Dec 2010 05:34

Austin wrote:FWIW the reason I have been told why the IAF is opting for a full package deal with French for M2K deal is because there is great deal of appreciation for the aircraft in totality and there is a lobby in the IAF that would want to see M2K gets the best suite rather then chopped up face lift.

And I'm thrilled that the lobby has won. This is one aircraft that when fully modernised to the -5 standard, is capable of taking on anything that the PAF can throw at it for the duration that it will serve. It only makes sense for the IAF to utilise it to its full capability when the GoI is willing to provide the funds, rather than some piecemeal LUSH Sea Harrier type upgrade that adds some capability but doesn't exploit its full potential.

The only question is regarding whether is it final or not that it is getting the RDY-3 and not the RDY-2. Upon looking at their brochure specs and comparing, they don't seem to have any big difference, and the RDY-3 has every single feature that all other pulse-doppler radars boast of, including in the A2G functions, GMTI/GMTT (Ground Moving Target Indication/Tracking) which reportedly is lacking in the Rafale's RBE-2 AESA (and which UAE wanted added since the APG-80 on their F-16 Block 60 already has it). The Elta 2032 also has the GMTI/GMTT function, but cannot comment on which is better.

Also features Terrain Avoidance that would be crucial to allow very low level nape of the earth strike missions into enemy territory. And Contour Mapping for blind penetration that would allow it to be used at low level for night strike missions. I don't think that the Elta 2032 has this feature, which is crucial for a nuclear strike role, where under no condition should the fighter carrying the bomb be discovered since it cannot jettison its nuke bomb and its fighting qualities will be highly compromised with such a large bomb attached to it.

And since different antenna sizes are available (based on the platform's nose and radome diameter) it will essentially be the same antenna size as the regular RDY-2, so range will not be very different (unless RDY-2 uses even more power).

Weight (<120 kgs) is almost the same as that of the Elta 2032 (said to be around 72-100 kgs depending on antenna size) and power consumption is higher (3.5 kVA) as compared to the Elta 2032 (~3 kVA), which might mean longer detection and tracking range as well.

All in all, this upgrade will put the Mirage back on top as one of the IAF's premier fighters alongwith the Su-30MKI, one that can be assigned difficult missions and expected to pull them off. 20 more years of that is not bad at all IMO. And all the infrastructure, maintenance facilities and training setup already in place won't be wasted. At a time when the IAF is in desperate need to bulk up, and cannot afford to let 3 squadrons of its only other multi-role aircraft go obsolete, this is the right decision.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 07 Dec 2010 06:43

Sandeep_ghosh wrote:Dear BR members,

I was wondering if we have adequate hardware for CAS role. Our prime ingress into conflict zone has been dependent on the three armored corps. Do we have sufficient aircrafts designated purely for CAS and anti armour warfare.

Do we need a A10 like aircraft which is dedicated to ground support role?

Are the Jaguars and MIG 27's sufficient is providing ground support in case of any aggression in the eastern border in mountainous terrain as they did not prove to be effective in kargil sector?

Thanks and regards

P.S Please use layman terms to answer the query if possible ,

Some of these things cannot be adequately explained using layman terms. Note that you have yourself used the acronym "CAS" - which in this context presumably means "Close Air Support" and not "Chief of Air Staff". If you are really interested in reading about it - the most revealing and lucid book I have read is Jasjit's Singh's book on air power. In fact - since we SDRE Indians rarely print more than 1000 copies of books (like the Moolagavkar book released recently) - Jasjit Singh's book is best read Xeroxed. (Maybe we SDREs should set up a system of book scanning and sharing of limited edition SDRE books and send money to the author every time we share - the Xeroxing is commonplace, but not the payment)

But I digress. What do you mean by "Close air support"? I will call it CAS as you have )presumably) done.

One of the points that Jasjit Singh makes is that for troops on the ground who are facing direct fire from the enemy - almost no degree of air support is enough. Added to this problem is an intense and hostile anti-aircraft environment on the battlefield may lead to a rapid attrition of air assets (aircraft and helicopters). If you could use magic and have unlimited numbers of aircraft and pilots then every situation could get unlimited numbers of aircraft. Bot that will not happen.

So the issue of close air support is a vexed one. With air assets being primarily in the hands of the air force - the army often feels that CAS is not always optimal. On the other hand the air force often knows that CAS in the battlefield is a temporary phenomenon because as long as the enemy's logistics lines are open he can bring in more supplies to the battlefield. So the air force often looks further away from the battlefield - looking at destroying supply dumps, bridges, railroads and choking off supplies so that the enemy is unable to replenish. But this means that limited air assets (aircraft, helicopters) will have to be diverted from CAS to interdiction of supply lines. The problem with this is that although this may be decisive for winning a battle - its effect comes only after hours or days - and the troops in the battlefield during those hours or days may feel that they did not have enough CAS and took too many casualties due to the fact that air assets were diverted away for interdiction.The troops fighting in those hours or days before the battle ends wil feel that they had no CAS. If you are getting hit by enemy fire and you cannot get CAS you are not going to think "Oh my aircraft are busy hitting logistics lines and I only have to put up with this fighting for another 48 hours." You will likely think "Heck - I have no CAS. Where the hell is my air force?"

This actually leads to a tussle between army and air force for air assets. Not just in India but in any country. One solution is for the army to acquire an air force of its own. The problem with this is that the air force has a monopoly on training and resources for air fighting. The army has to diversify and take on tasks for which it is not specialised to do that and will have to acquire the land and infrastructure that an air force requires.

Compromises can be reached. One compromise is to let the army have a dedicated helicopter assault force that can be used for CAS - using LCH or armed ALH and Mi 35s. The other thing is to have extremely good coordination between army and air force so that in war they work together as a seamless team.

The point of course is not just the acquisition of A-10 like aircraft, but who operates the, where they will be based? Who will maintain them? Who will prioritize targets? Will here be separate army and air force air bases? If the army operates an air force of A-10 who will provide escort air cover for those A-10 like aircraft? Will the army then have to maintain its own fleet of Tejas air defence fighters to give CAS to the army's fleet of A-10s? Wheer will these be based? Who will train the pilots? What is the need and rational for a separate army and a separat air force training system?

The USA is one nation that has a separate air force for its army and the USAF is separate. The US navy maintains its own air force. Of course everyone on earth wants to do what the US does. Sometimes that is good. Sometimes it is not. We have to decide that for ourselves. The US system has some severe weaknesses and great strengths - but that is a separate issue. We SDREs have to look for compromise solutions that we can afford and implement.

So the short answer to your question: "Do we have enough CAS assets?" is "Probably not". That is my opinion. I would like to see a powerful fleet of combat helicopters used by the army for their CAS while the air force does its job as only the air force can do.

ranjithnath · Post by **ranjithnath** » 07 Dec 2010 07:12

(Maybe we SDREs should set up a system of book scanning and sharing of limited edition SDRE books and send money to the author every time we share - the Xeroxing is commonplace, but not the payment)

a bit OT but now thats really something that we must consider.any ideas how we can implement it efficiently??

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 07 Dec 2010 08:16

Mirage-2000 upgrade almost finalised and to be signed in around 2 weeks. It'll apparently use a HAL designed Mission Computer as the interface between the MDPU (Modular Data Processing Unit) and HMDS (Top-Owl-F?), CMDS, LDP (Litening?) and the ACMI pod. There seem to be 2 phases for the upgrade as well, with the HAL MC being ready during what might be the FOC phase of the program.

A hardfought $2.1-billion deal to upgrade the Indian Air Force's fleet of about 50 Mirage-2000 multirole fighters is final, with a formal agreement expected to be signed in two weeks.

article link

Ashutosh Malik · Post by **Ashutosh Malik** » 07 Dec 2010 08:33

shiv wrote:
Sandeep_ghosh wrote:Dear BR members,

I was ...............

P.S Please use layman terms to answer the query if possible ,
Some of these things ..............the most revealing and lucid book I have read is Jasjit's Singh's book on air power. In fact - since we SDRE Indians rarely print more than 1000 copies of books (like the Moolagavkar book released recently) - ..............................................combat helicopters used by the army for their CAS while the air force does its job as only the air force can do.

Hi Shiv,

Is the book, that you have mentioned above, the following?

"Aerospace Power and India's Defence"

By Knowledge World and Centre for Air Power Studies
ISBN: 81-87966-48-3

Best regards.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 07 Dec 2010 08:47

Ashutosh Malik wrote:
Is the book, that you have mentioned above, the following?

"Aerospace Power and India's Defence"

By Knowledge World and Centre for Air Power Studies
ISBN: 81-87966-48-3

Best regards.

No the book I am speaking of is slightly dated but brilliant. "Air Power in modern warfare".

Bala Vignesh · Post by **Bala Vignesh** » 07 Dec 2010 09:22

^^ Shiv sir, is the above mentioned book available in your hallowed library??? Would help in this young jingo to learn more...

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 07 Dec 2010 09:32

ranjithnath wrote: a bit OT but now thats really something that we must consider.any ideas how we can implement it efficiently??

In India it is easy to get a book Xeroxed in a couple of hours. The alternative - page by page scanning is messy and slow on home scanners but that would be best for our needs. And OCR will take a lifetime. Ideally I think you need:

1) transparent glass sheet
2) Book to be scanned
3) digital camera with optical zoom/macro
4) tripod

Place book on floor. Flatten page with glass. Position camera with tripod above book and glass. Take photo. Turn page and repeat.

Bala Vignesh I have to give you 2 books anyway - maybe the third will somehow appear inshallah.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 07 Dec 2010 10:19

Kartik wrote:And I'm thrilled that the lobby has won. This is one aircraft that when fully modernised to the -5 standard,

I am thrilled too but I am unhappy that they managed to make 2.1 billion for 50 odd aircraft compared to $960 million for 66 plus Mig-29 , the latter gets multirole capability and new RD-33-series 3 engine from HAL.

Bang for buck the Mig-29 upgrade is cost effective one while the french has sqeezed us like a lemon.

negi · Post by **negi** » 07 Dec 2010 10:42

Yeah looks pricey, hey but key point to note is ToI story mentions 'MICA' as part of the upgrade program. Btw I am curious as to how many more hours are left in these airframes and engines ? Also as I understand we are only overhauling the existing engines.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 07 Dec 2010 10:55

Both Mig-29UPG and M2K post upgrade will add 25 years of life.

The MICA upgrade will give it a BVR capability but the newest R-77/R-73 and the R-27 will give the 29UPG better capability then MICA.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 07 Dec 2010 10:59

Austin wrote:
Kartik wrote:And I'm thrilled that the lobby has won. This is one aircraft that when fully modernised to the -5 standard,
I am thrilled too but I am unhappy that they managed to make 2.1 billion for 50 odd aircraft compared to $960 million for 66 plus Mig-29 , the latter gets multirole capability and new RD-33-series 3 engine from HAL.

Bang for buck the Mig-29 upgrade is cost effective one while the french has sqeezed us like a lemon.

But the MiG-29 upgrade didn't include any weapons, this one does, for a fleet of 50+ Mirages they should get a few hundred MICA missiles and those are expensive missiles.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 07 Dec 2010 11:38

atleast Mica exists today and is reasonably expected to work , while the much needed R73 and R77 replacements (both the interim and final solns to match the amraam-D and aim9x) are nowhere in sight with no word on test flights, progress, delivery dates to potential clients and IOC. Rus has no urgent need before IOC of PakFa in a decade.

I have kind of given up hope on that...we need to get the Astra in service asap and make a Astra++ .... no word on that either :howl:

vardhank · Post by **vardhank** » 07 Dec 2010 11:49

Shiv,
Nice post on CAS, covers great ground.
Maybe we need a Joint Air Support Group or something - trained by the IAF and using IAF bases, but bankrolled and under the command of the Army. You'd need to have choppers, attack planes and top-cover fighters training together, able to move around together, and pretty much solely used for micro-strikes (my own term

) and helping infantry and mech forces exactly where they're operating.
Shouldn't forget the RAF in WW2, so happy to concentrate on strategic bombing that for quite a while they didn't bother with CAS at all, which proved critical in the early phase of the war. Of course, interdiction of supply lines etc is much closer to the front than strategic bombing, but I think even that small gap between what a grunt needs to inch ahead at the front and what will affect him a week later, needs to be covered.
JMT.
PS - I think the Jingo-1, supported by A2A-only Tejas and the LCH, would kick some serious butt here.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 07 Dec 2010 12:29

Air Cmde B Chandra Sekhar is AOC Eastern Air Command, Adv Hqs

The Advance HQs of EAC is responsible for close liaison with the Indian Army’s Eastern Command and the West Bengals Naval Formation in order to maintain a Synergy of a high degree between the three services in the Eastern theater. The AOC of Advance HQs EAC would also responsible for close liaison with the civil administration of West Bengal for aid to civil authority in times of natural calamities etc.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 07 Dec 2010 12:35

Kartik wrote:But the MiG-29 upgrade didn't include any weapons, this one does, for a fleet of 50+ Mirages they should get a few hundred MICA missiles and those are expensive missiles.

The R-77 is in wide service and so are the A2G weapons that can be used on Mig-29 in the IADF and as such Mig-29 has BVR capability both Active/SARH for decades now.

For Mirage a BVR Active is something that will come post upgrade , so you are comparing a capability which existed to a capability which will come post upgrade.

Certainly the 29UPG will be able to track and guide more number AA-12 and will be using the newer longer range RVV-SD and RVV-MD.

The MICA on the other hand tries to do both the task of WVR and BVR hence falls short on range compared to AMRAAM and R-77 variants.

Singha R-77, R-73 Missile Upgrades Emerge

I still think the $2.1 billion upgrade is a plain rip off ,well one would say it is better then $2.5 B that French were demanding

koti · Post by **koti** » 07 Dec 2010 13:01

Austin wrote:Both Mig-29UPG and M2K post upgrade will add 25 years of life.

The MICA upgrade will give it a BVR capability but the newest R-77/R-73 and the R-27 will give the 29UPG better capability then MICA.

How will an avionics and weapon upgrade will increase an aircrafts life sir?
I agree that it shall increase the aircraft's active service by those many years by removing sensor and avionic obsolesce, but how will that address its airframe and engine obsolesce?
I hope we wont need to go in for another round of Mirage upgrade this time for engines and airframe components.

parshuram · Post by **parshuram** » 07 Dec 2010 13:22

Livefist :: IAF M2K upgrade

Would this upgrade for IAF mirages be par with Qatari Mirages or even better then those ?

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 07 Dec 2010 13:30

frequently aircraft upgrades involve modifications to the airframe to extend the life - we need to read the small print of the deal

anyway, given the rate that MMRCA procurement is going at, the M2K's will be in service for a long time yet

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 07 Dec 2010 13:40

koti wrote:How will an avionics and weapon upgrade will increase an aircrafts life sir?

Its Avionics ,Weapons,Structural ,Engine upgrade (for Mig-29 ) and complete overhaul of airframe which will increase their service life by 25 years.

koti · Post by **koti** » 07 Dec 2010 13:57

Austin wrote:
koti wrote:How will an avionics and weapon upgrade will increase an aircrafts life sir?
Its Avionics ,Weapons,Structural ,Engine upgrade (for Mig-29 ) and complete overhaul of airframe which will increase their service life by 25 years.

Point taken wrt Mig.
But I was referring to the M2K. It is only getting avionics and weapons in its upgrade.
So can I conclude that unless the M2K gets its engine and airframe upgraded, will not be able to achieve the said(20-25years) life expectancy?

Coming to Mig, I believe almost all of the critical and costly components are up for upgrade.(Except ejector seats

)
What are going to be retained?

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 07 Dec 2010 15:02

Mirage-2000’s roll for upgrade takeoff starts
DNA News

The file for upgrade of 51 Mirage-2000 aircraft was moved by the air headquarters in 2007 and was under study by OEM. There was strong speculation that the deal would be signed during Sarkozy’s second visit, but a joint statement said, “Discussions concerning the upgrading of Mirage-2000 aircraft are expected to be finalised soon.”

MoD sources indicated the discussions would relate to product support, after which the deal may be inked in a few weeks. The Mirage-2000 repair contract expired in March-April 2007, and an extension was sought by MoD till September 2007. OEMs Dassault and Snecma had sought a 30% increase in repair cost but MoD and Indian Air Force (IAF) were not ready, which delayed renewal of the contract.

Considering the obstinate stance of the French government on negotiating the price in the existing maintenance agreement, India decided to accept a door-to-door policy put forth by the French for maintenance of Mirage in July 2008. The expensive door-to-door maintenance was accepted as an interim measure to keep the fleet of the 50-odd aircraft left in the IAF inventory active.

Under the arrangement, OEM Dassault would repair the frontline, multi-role aircraft as and when the need arises by picking up “repairable” spares directly from the unit and delivering them back, thereby saving time and holding the repair-providing manufacturer completely accountable. IAF has about 50 two-decade-old Mirage aircraft, used for air defence and ground attacks, in three squadrons based in Gwalior for peacetime. Items to be repaired first come to equipment depots and then to movement controls, after which they are couriered to the place of repair abroad. The delivery of repaired items sometimes takes a year, but the door-to-door policy saves time.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 07 Dec 2010 15:06

Indian Air chief stresses on efficient productivity and maintenance
Brahmand

Chief of the Indian Air Staff, Air Chief Marshal Pradeep Vasant Naik on Monday emphasised on efficiency in productivity and logistics management in the Air Force. He also stressed on the need for focusing on 2011 as the Year of Maintenance and called upon the Commanders to initiate measures for improving serviceability of aircraft and weapon systems.

Naik was addressing the Commanders of the Stations under Maintenance Command at a two-day Annual Commanders Conference aiming to review the progress of ongoing projects at their units under and evolve strategies to tackle issues arising out of induction of new technology and weapon systems in IAF. The Chief of Air Staff apprised commanders about the security scenario in the region and modernisation plans of the Indian Air Force to develop the desired capabilities.

He stressed on the need to inculcate flight safety consciousness amongst all personnel and better utilisation of precious resources through innovation and initiative. Naik appreciated the performance of the Maintenance Command units and asked them to strive hard for further enhancement of the standard of their Depots, according to a defence release. The Air Chief advised the Commanders to be more vigilant, agile and well prepared to meet any eventuality.

Naik presented trophies for outstanding performance to selected Base Repair Depots (BRDs) and Equipment Depots (EDs). Performance reviews of respective Branches at Command Headquarters were carried out by Senior Maintenance Staff Officer, Air Officer-in-charge Engineering Services and Senior Air and Administration Staff Officer. A special session was held for discussions on work ethics with a view to enhance synergy of human effort in production and maintenance. In addition, issues related to Quality Management System (QMS) of units, minimisation of wastage in production, repair, overhaul maintenance and logistics process were the focus of discussion during the conference.